DOCSLIB.ORG

Statement of Catherine Chase President Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety on “Autonomous Vehicles: Promises and Challenges

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Statement of Catherine Chase President Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety on “Autonomous Vehicles: Promises and Challenges STATEMENT OF CATHERINE CHASE PRESIDENT ADVOCATES FOR HIGHWAY AND AUTO SAFETY ON “AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES: PROMISES AND CHALLENGES OF EVOLVING AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGIES” SUBMITTED TO THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE SUBCOMMITTEE ON CONSUMER PROTECTION AND COMMERCE FEBRUARY 11, 2020 Introduction Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates) is a coalition of public health, safety, and consumer organizations, insurers and insurance agents that promotes highway and auto safety through the adoption of federal and state laws, policies and regulations. Advocates is unique both in its board composition and its mission of advancing safer vehicles, safer motorists and road users, and safer infrastructure. In 2018, 36,560 people were killed and 2.7 million people were injured in motor vehicle crashes.1 Moreover, crashes impose a financial toll of well over $800 billion in total costs to society and $242 billion in direct economic costs, equivalent to a “crash tax” of $784 on every American.2 This carnage and expense are unacceptable. Our Nation is at a Transformational Time in Transportation History with Innovative and Cost-Efficient Safety Solutions Proven to be Effective and Available Every day on average, over 100 people are killed and nearly 7,500 people are injured in motor vehicle crashes. While far too many lives are lost and people are injured on our Nation’s roads each year, proven solutions are currently available that can prevent or mitigate these senseless tragedies. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) currently values each life lost in a crash at $9.6 million. Each one of these preventable deaths not only irreparably harms families and communities, but they also impose significant economic costs on society that can and should be avoided. Advocates remains optimistic that in the future autonomous vehicles (AVs) may bring about meaningful and lasting reductions in motor vehicle crashes. However, that potential remains far from a near-term certainty or reality. As Dr. M. L. Cummings, the well-known and well-respected Director of the Humans and Autonomy Lab, Pratt School of Engineering, Duke University, notes in Rethinking the maturity of artificial intelligence in safety- critical settings: While AI augmentation of humans in safety-critical systems is well within reach, this success should not be mistaken for the ability of AI to replace humans in such systems. Such a step is exponential in difficulty and with the inability of machine learning, or really any form of AI reasoning, to replicate top-down reasoning to resolve uncertainty, AI-enabled systems should not be operating in safety critical systems without significant human oversight.3 Therefore, it is essential to take lifesaving action now to require all new vehicles be equipped with available vehicle technologies, also known as advanced driver-assistance systems (ADAS), which prevent and lessen the severity of crashes. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has included increasing implementation of collision avoidance technologies in its Most Wanted Lists of Transportation Safety Improvements since 2016.4 It is a transformational time in transportation innovation with the recent availability of new safety technologies in vehicles to prevent or mitigate crashes and protect occupants and road users. 1 Statistics are from the U.S. Department of Transportation unless otherwise noted. 2 “The Economic and Societal Impact of Motor Vehicle Crashes, 2010,” NHTSA (2015). 3 Cummings, M.L, "Rethinking the maturity of artificial intelligence in safety-critical settings," AI Magazine, in review. 4 NTSB Most Wanted List Archives, https://ntsb.gov/safety/mwl/Pages/mwl_archive.aspx 1 Currently available proven collision avoidance systems include automatic emergency braking (AEB), lane departure warning (LDW), blind spot detection (BSD), rear AEB and rear cross- traffic alert. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has found that: • AEB can decrease front-to-rear crashes with injuries by 56 percent; • LDW can reduce single-vehicle, sideswipe and head-on injury crashes by over 20 percent; • BSD can diminish injury crashes from lane change by nearly 25 percent; • Rear AEB can reduce backing crashes by 78 percent when combined with rearview camera and parking sensors; and, • Rear cross-traffic alert can reduce backing crashes by 22 percent.5 These crash avoidance safety systems are often sold as part of an additional, expensive trim package along with other non-safety features, or included as standard equipment in high end models or vehicles. Moreover, there are currently no minimum performance standards to ensure they execute as expected. The IIHS has also found that while nighttime visibility is essential for safety, few vehicles are equipped with headlights that perform well.6 Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 108 should be upgraded to improve headlight performance. Unfortunately, directives from Congress are needed to accomplish these needed improvements because of Agency inaction and industry resistance. Furthermore, voluntary industry agreements have been demonstrated to be ineffective as most recently evidenced by the March 2016 agreement among 20 automakers to have AEBs in most new light vehicles by 2023. To date, two manufacturers, which account for nearly a third of the U.S. auto market, demonstrate this lackluster response to the detriment of the motoring public. Only 29 percent of General Motors’ vehicles and 9.5 percent of Fiat Chrysler vehicles were sold with AEB between September 1, 2018 through August 31, 2019. Moreover, at any time, an automaker could decide it no longer wants to comply with the agreement without any ramifications. Advocates urges Congress to require that advanced technologies which have proven to be effective at preventing and mitigating crashes be standard equipment with minimum performance standards. Advocates is a long-time proponent of this strategy which has produced numerous safety successes including airbags, electronic stability control, and most recently rearview cameras. In fact, in 2015 NHTSA estimated that since 1960, more than 600,000 lives have been saved by motor vehicle safety technologies.7 Legislation already has been introduced in the 116th Congress which, if enacted, would achieve the goal of providing lifesaving technologies as standard equipment on new motor vehicles. The Protecting Roadside First Responders Act (H.R. 4871/S. 2700) directs the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to require certain crash avoidance technologies that meet a minimum performance requirement in all new vehicles. We urge Congress to enact this legislation promptly. Congress should also swiftly enact the Safe Roads Act of 2019 (H.R. 3773) and the 5 IIHS, Real world benefits of crash avoidance technologies, available at: https://www.iihs.org/media/259e5bbd- f859-42a7-bd54-3888f7a2d3ef/e9boUQ/Topics/ADVANCED%20DRIVER%20ASSISTANCE/IIHS-real-world- CA-benefits.pdf 6 IIHS, Headlights improve, but base models leave drivers in the dark (Nov. 29, 2018). 7 Lives Saved by Vehicle Safety Technologies and Associated Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, 1960 to 2012, DOT HS 812 069 (NHTSA, 2015). 2 School Bus Safety Act of 2019 (H.R. 3959/S.2278), legislation which would require advanced technologies in commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) and school buses. Additionally, more than 900 children have died in hot cars since 1990. Education and awareness are at an all-time high, yet the number of children dying in hot cars is also at an all-time high. Inexpensive technology exists and is available today that can detect the presence of an occupant in a car and engage a variety of alerts in the form of honking horns, flashing lights, dashboard warnings or text messages. Congress should enact the Hot Cars Act (H.R. 3593) which directs the Secretary of Transportation to issue a rule requiring such technology in all new cars. Such detection systems may have other useful applications. For example, this type of technology could detect whether occupants are properly restrained and may satisfy requirements for occupant protection. Specifically, the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) Act (Pub. L. 112-141) directed the U.S. DOT to issue a rule requiring rear seat belt reminders in all new cars by October 2015. This regulation, which is long overdue, could be potentially met by an occupant detection sensor. In the future, as driverless cars are deployed, this type of technology could communicate to the AV system that the car is occupied and would support determining if those occupants are restrained properly. On the path to AVs, requiring minimum performance standards for these foundational technologies will ensure the safety of all road users while also building consumer confidence in the capabilities of these newer crash avoidance technologies. Autonomous Vehicles: What the Public is Thinking, What’s Happening on Public Roads, What Other Countries are Doing, and What Industry Executives are Predicting AVs, also known as driverless cars, are being developed and tested on public roads without sufficient safeguards to protect both those within the AVs and everyone sharing the roadways with them, and without express consent. Advocates is very concerned that an artificial rush to pass legislation, fueled by AV manufacturers wanting to be the first to market and recoup their substantial investments, already surpassing $100 billion, could significantly undermine safety
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Transcript (299.22
    Internet of Things FTC Workshop November 19, 2013 Segment 4 Transcript >> WE'RE GOING TO GET STARTED. THIS IS PANEL THREE. THIS IS ON THE CONNECTED CARS. THIS IS PANEL THREE ON CONNECTED CARS. I'M KAREN JAGIELSKI AND I AM JOINED BY MY CO-MODERATOR. WIRE GOING TO INTRODUCE THE PANELISTS IN JUST A MINUTE. THIS IS A SHORT PANEL. WE ONLY HAVE AN HOUR, SO WE'RE GOING TO QUICKLY GET THROUGH INTRODUCTIONS AND THEN GET TO THE HEART OF THE SITUATION. SO WITH THAT, I'D ASK MY PANELISTS TO INTRODUCE THEMSELVES AND TELL US JUST A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOURSELVES. >> HI, MY NAME IS TADAYOSHI KOHNO AND I'M A PROFESSOR AT THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON. MY AREA OF EXPERTISE IS COMPUTER SECURITY. ONE FOCUS WE LOOK AT IS SECURITY FOR CYBER SYSTEMS FOR MEDICAL DEVICES, HOME AUTOMATION, CHILDREN TOISES AND FOR PURPOSES OF TODAY TALKING ABOUT THE WORK WE'VE BEEN DOING FOR THE SECURITY AND PRIVACY OF THE MODERN AUTOMOBILE. >> I'M CHRIS WOLF, FOUNDER AND CO-CHAIR OF THE FUTURE PRIVACY FORUM. I LEAD THE PRIVACY PRACTICE AT HOGAN LEVELS AT THE FUTURE PRIVACY FORUM. WE'VE BEEN DOING A LOT OF WORK IN THE FIVE YEARS WE'VE BEEN AROUND ON THE INTERNET OF THING STARTING WITH OUR EFFORTS ON THE CODE OF CONDUCT ON THE SMART GRID, MORE RECENTLY DEALING WITH RETAIL LOCATION STANDARDS AND WE ALSO HAVE A CONNECTED PAR PROJECT THAT'S GOING ON AT FBF. TODAY WE PUBLISHED A PAPER CALLED AN UPDATED PRIVACY PARADIGM FOR THE INTERNET OF THINGS AND I GUESS I'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT DURING THE PANEL.
    [Show full text]
  • Testimony for House EC on Self-Driving Cars 11-15-2016 Final
    Statement of Laura MacCleery Vice President, Consumer Policy and Mobilization, Consumer Reports Before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade “Disrupter Series: Self-Driving Cars” Tuesday, November 15, 2016 Summary • Traffic deaths on U.S. roads rose to 35,092 last year and are estimated to have jumped another 10% in the first half of 2016. This is a public health crisis. We urgently need to find ways to prevent more traffic deaths and injuries and meaningfully counter this trend. • Crashworthiness improvements should continue or even be accelerated as an accompaniment to technological advances, and defects and recalls should be more aggressively overseen and pursued as warranted by the facts. • Automated driving systems—intended to yield self-driving cars—are advancing rapidly, and may be part of the solution. However, there is much more work that needs to be done to test and demonstrate safety benefits and protect consumers from novel risks. • This is particularly true regarding cars with semi-autonomous features, which if deployed irresponsibly can give consumers a dangerously false sense of security. • As the industry’s regulator, NHTSA can ensure that companies put consumers first by setting robust safety standards. NHTSA’s recent guidance rightly covers a wide range of important subjects, but it is light on specific steps companies must take to assure safety. • To protect the public and build trust in automated driving features, Congress should provide NHTSA the resources to independently and thoroughly assess the safety of automated systems and better understand how drivers interact with these new features.
    [Show full text]
  • The Center for Auto Safety
    CCEENNTTEERR FFOORR AAUUTTOO SSAAFFEETTYY 1825 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite 330 Washington, DC 20009-1160 (202) 328-7700 Attachment A MISSION STATEMENT The Center for Auto Safety (CAS) is a nonprofit research and advocacy organization founded by Consumers Union and Ralph Nader in 1970 to provide consumers with a voice for auto safety and quality in Washington, D.C. and to assist owners of "lemon" vehicles to file complaints and obtain relief. Although CAS has a staff of less than a dozen people, its work is supported by approximately 20,000 members across the United States, and it is nationally recognized as a leader in the areas of automobile safety and consumer protection. CAS vigorously supports economically feasible motor vehicle safety policies that will reduce the risk of crash-related deaths and injuries. CAS serves as an important counterweight before federal policymakers to the automobile industry, whose positions on these safety issues are dictated by the desire to maximize profits for shareholders rather than to strike the proper balance between safety and other vehicle features. In fulfilling its mission, CAS is engaged in the following activities: Χ Researching defects in motor vehicles and monitoring defect investigations conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and other federal agencies; Χ Obtaining information on potential vehicle safety defects from consumers, alerting NHTSA to these problems, and requesting that NHTSA undertake investigations; Χ Responding with comments to agency rulemaking
    [Show full text]
  • Increased Automobile Fuel Efficiency and Synthetic Fuels: Alternatives for Reducing Oil Imports
    Increased Automobile Fuel Efficiency and Synthetic Fuels: Alternatives for Reducing Oil Imports September 1982 NTIS order #PB83-126094 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 82-600603 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 Foreword This report presents the findings of an assessment requested by the Senate Com- mittee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. The study assesses and compares increased automobile fuel efficiency and synthetic fuels production with respect to their potential to reduce conventional oil consumption, and their costs and impacts. Con- servation and fuel switching as a means of reducing stationary oil uses are also con- sidered, but in considerably less detail, in order to enable estimates of plausible future oil imports. We are grateful for the assistance of the project advisory panels and the many other people who provided advice, information, and reviews. It should be understood, how- ever, that OTA assumes full responsibility for this report, which does not necessarily represent the views of individual members of the advisory panels. Director Automobile Fuel Efficiency Advisory Panel Michael J. Rabins, Chairman Wayne State University Maudine R. Cooper* John B. Heywood National Urban League, Inc. Massachusetts Institute of Technology John Ferron John Holden National Automobile Dealers Association Ford Motor Co. Donald Friedman Maryann N. Keller Minicar, Inc. Paine, Webber, Mitchell, & Hutchins Herbert Fuhrman Paul Larsen National Institute for GMC Truck and Coach Division Automobile Service Excellence Robert D. Nell James M. Gill Consumers Union The Ethyl Corp. Kenneth Orski R. Eugene Goodson** German Marshall Fund of the United States Hoover Universal, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Citizen Copyright © 2016 by Public Citizen Foundation All Rights Reserved
    Public Citizen Copyright © 2016 by Public Citizen Foundation All rights reserved. Public Citizen Foundation 1600 20th St. NW Washington, D.C. 20009 www.citizen.org ISBN: 978-1-58231-099-2 Doyle Printing, 2016 Printed in the United States of America PUBLIC CITIZEN THE SENTINEL OF DEMOCRACY CONTENTS Preface: The Biggest Get ...................................................................7 Introduction ....................................................................................11 1 Nader’s Raiders for the Lost Democracy....................................... 15 2 Tools for Attack on All Fronts.......................................................29 3 Creating a Healthy Democracy .....................................................43 4 Seeking Justice, Setting Precedents ..............................................61 5 The Race for Auto Safety ..............................................................89 6 Money and Politics: Making Government Accountable ..............113 7 Citizen Safeguards Under Siege: Regulatory Backlash ................155 8 The Phony “Lawsuit Crisis” .........................................................173 9 Saving Your Energy .................................................................... 197 10 Going Global ...............................................................................231 11 The Fifth Branch of Government................................................ 261 Appendix ......................................................................................271 Acknowledgments ........................................................................289
    [Show full text]
  • Plaintiffs, ) ) V
    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CENTER FOR AUTO SAFETY, et al., ) ) Case No. 04-0392 (ESH) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC ) SAFETY ADMINISTRATION, ) ) Defendant. ) ____________________________________) MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS This case challenges a de facto legislative rule, promulgated in a 1998 letter to auto manufacturers from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (“NHTSA”), that permits vehicle manufacturers to conduct “regional recalls.” Regional recalls exclude vehicle owners residing in large parts of the country from the warning and free remedy that is guaranteed by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (“Safety Act”) to all owners of motor vehicles containing safety-related defects. In its motion to dismiss, NHTSA suggests that plaintiffs Public Citizen and the Center for Auto Safety want to substitute their judgment for that of the agency. To the contrary, through this lawsuit, plaintiffs hope to force NHTSA to comply with Congress’s judgment that safety recalls should protect all motorists, not just those living in select states. NHTSA’s motion falters from the start by mischaracterizing the complaint. Contrary to NHTSA’s repeated statements, plaintiffs are not challenging individual past or future regional recalls. Rather, plaintiffs challenge NHTSA’s across-the-board rule authorizing and setting the standards for regional recalls. The agency’s 1998 letters to auto manufacturers contain specific directives and requirements controlling the conduct of regional recalls, which both bind manufacturers and limit NHTSA’s discretion to take certain actions. Furthermore, plaintiffs have standing to bring this action, as amply illustrated by the complaint, declarations ignored by NHTSA, and additional declarations submitted with this opposition.
    [Show full text]
  • Senator SIMON. Mr. Chairman, If I Could Just Say I Am Going to the Same Press Conference on Health Care
    468 Senator SIMON. Mr. Chairman, if I could just say I am going to the same press conference on health care. The CHAIRMAN. One thing Mr. Nader understands is press con- ferences, and I am sure he will understand your need to be there. Senator METZENBAUM. Also, he understands health care. The CHAIRMAN. He understands health care, as well. As a matter of fact, I am surprised he is not going to the press conference with you. Senator COHEN. Mr. Chairman, I am told there is going to be a vote at 1:45 p.m. The CHAIRMAN. I am glad to be informed of all these things. Why don't we just begin and we will see where the schedule takes us. Mr. Nader, welcome. PANEL CONSISTING OF RALPH NADER, WASHINGTON, DC; SID- NEY M. WOLFE, CITIZEN'S GROUP, WASHINGTON, DC; LLOYD CONSTANTINE, CONSTANTINE & ASSOCIATES, NEW YORK, NY; AND RALPH ZESTES, KOGOD COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AD- MINISTRATION, AMERICAN UNIVERSITY, WASHINGTON, DC STATEMENT OF RALPH NADER Mr. NADER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the com- mittee. I would like to submit my 20-page testimony and note that there are five important attachments: First, one by Professor Carstensen, of the University of Wisconsin Law School, dealing with the case of price squeeze that was so widely discussed earlier in these hear- ings, a case by Judge Breyer; second, a thorough critique by a friend of Judge Breyer, but he is a critic, Professor Tom McGarity, of the University of Texas Law School, on Judge Breyer's health and environmental safety positions; third, a critique of Judge Breyer's chapter on the National Highway Traffic Safety Adminis- tration, by Clarence Ditlow and Joan Claybrook, which illustrates that some of Judge Breyer's research is quite shoddy; fourth, a list of very stimulating questions by Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Regulatory Management of the Automobile in the United States, 1966–1988
    FEDERAL REGULATORY MANAGEMENT OF THE AUTOMOBILE IN THE UNITED STATES, 1966–1988 by LEE JARED VINSEL DISSERTATION Presented to the Faculty of the College of Humanities and Social Sciences of Carnegie Mellon University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Carnegie Mellon University May 2011 Dissertation Committee: Professor David A. Hounshell, Chair Professor Jay Aronson Professor John Soluri Professor Joel A. Tarr Professor Steven Usselman (Georgia Tech) © 2011 Lee Jared Vinsel ii Dedication For the Vinsels, the McFaddens, and the Middletons and for Abigail, who held the ship steady iii Abstract Federal Regulatory Management of the Automobile in the United States, 1966–1988 by LEE JARED VINSEL Dissertation Director: Professor David A. Hounshell Throughout the 20th century, the automobile became the great American machine, a technological object that became inseparable from every level of American life and culture from the cycles of the national economy to the passions of teen dating, from the travails of labor struggles to the travels of “soccer moms.” Yet, the automobile brought with it multiple dimensions of risk: crashes mangled bodies, tailpipes spewed toxic exhausts, and engines “guzzled” increasingly limited fuel resources. During the 1960s and 1970s, the United States Federal government created institutions—primarily the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration within the Department of Transportation and the Office of Mobile Source Pollution Control in the Environmental Protection Agency—to regulate the automobile industry around three concerns, namely crash safety, fuel efficiency, and control of emissions. This dissertation examines the growth of state institutions to regulate these three concerns during the 1960s and 1970s through the 1980s when iv the state came under fire from new political forces and governmental bureaucracies experienced large cutbacks in budgets and staff.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Government: Lessons from America
    OPEN GOVERNMENT Lessons from America STEWART DRESNER May 1980 £3.00 OPEN GOVERNMENT: LESSONS FROM AMERICA CONTENTS Page Foreword Preface I Introduction 1 II The Open Government Concept and the British Government response 3 III Hew Open Government Legislation works in the United States 8 (1) Hie Freedom of Information Act 8 (2) The Privacy Act 25 (3) The Government in the Sunshine Act 31 IV What needs to be kept secret? 42 V Who uses the American Open Government Laws? 60 (1) Public Interest Groups 61 (2) The Media 69 (3) Individuals and Scholars 74 (4) Companies 76 (5) Civil Servants 80 VI Balancing Public Access to Government Information with the Protection of Individual Privacy 88 (1) The Issues 88 (2) The Protection of Personal Information by the U.S. Privacy Act 1974 91 (3) The Personal Privacy Exenption to the 101A 96 (4) The Relationship between the IOIA and the PA 98 (5) Public Access and Privacy Protection in an Administrative Programme 99 ii Page VII Ensuring Government Compliance with Public Access legislation 105 (1) Actaiinistrative Procedures 105 (2) Appeal Procedures 107 (3) Monitoring the Effectiveness of Public Access Legislation 117 VIII Ihe Costs and Benefits of Open Government 126 (1) National Security 127 (2) Constitutional Relationships 127 (3) Administrative and other Costs 132 IX Conclusion: Information, Democracy and Power 141 Bibliography i-xi FOREWORD Last year the related subjects of official secrets and freedom of information had a thorough but abortive airing. Mr. Clement Freud's Official Information Bill after a long and interesting committee stage became a victim of the general election.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lemon Book: Auto Rights by Ralph Nader;Clarence Ditlow
    The Lemon Book: Auto Rights By Ralph Nader;Clarence Ditlow Used Car Lemon Law Fact Sheet Auto Leasing Rights; Auto Repair Tips; Basic Banking; Before You Hire An Auto Mechanic; Buying Online; Car Rental Tip Sheet; Buy The Lemon Book: Auto Rights by Ralph Nader, Clarence Ditlow (ISBN: 9781559210195) from Amazon's Book Store. Free UK delivery on eligible orders. The Lemon Book: Auto Rights. Introduction; Buy This Book; Read Online; Export Data; Author: Ralph Nader, Clarence Ditlow, Laura Polacheck, Tamar Publisher: Moyer former administrator of NHTSA and now head of Ralph Nader's Public Citizen, Clarence Ditlow, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. All Rights Reserved. Clarence Ditlow is the author of Little Secrets of the Auto Industry (0.0 avg rating, 0 ratings, 0 reviews, Lemon laws are American state laws that provide a remedy for purchasers of cars and other consumer goods in order to compensate for products that repeatedly fail to Texas laws related to warranty performance may cover your vehicle if your used vehicle is Check the information on the Texas Lemon Law that came with your vehicle. Auto Rights: Ralph Nader, Clarence Ditlow: 9781559211963: Books - Amazon.ca Amazon Try Prime. Your Store Deals Store Gift Cards Sell Help en fran ais. Shop by Clarence Ditlow. At the center of the Chrysler recall drama, a Center for Auto Safety and an early acolyte of the safety crusader Ralph Nader, Ralph Nader is a consumer a scathing indictment that lambasted the auto industry for producing unsafe Nader, Ralph, and Clarence Ditlow. Lemon Book: Ralph Nader is 69.
    [Show full text]
  • Adverse Event Reporting System for Dietary Supplements: an Inadequate Safety Valve (OEI-01- 00-00180; 04/01)
    Department of Health and Human Services OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Adverse Event Reporting For Dietary Supplements An Inadequate Safety Valve APRIL 2001 OEI-01-00-00180 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL The mission of the Office of Inspector General (OIG), as mandated by Public Law 95-452, is to protect the integrity of the Department of Health and Human Services programs as well as the health and welfare of beneficiaries served by them. This statutory mission is carried out through a nationwide program of audits, investigations, inspections, sanctions, and fraud alerts. The Inspector General informs the Secretary of program and management problems and recommends legislative, regulatory, and operational approaches to correct them. Office of Evaluation and Inspections The Office of Evaluation and Inspections (OEI) is one of several components of the Office of Inspector General. It conducts short-term management and program evaluations (called inspections) that focus on issues of concern to the Department, the Congress, and the public. The inspection reports provide findings and recommendations on the efficiency, vulnerability, and effectiveness of departmental programs. OEI's Boston Regional Office prepared this report under the direction of Mark R. Yessian, Ph.D., Regional Inspector General and Joyce M. Greenleaf, M.B.A., Assistant Regional Inspector General. Principal OEI staff included: BOSTON HEADQUARTERS Laura C. McBride, Lead Analyst Elise Stein, Program Specialist Aimee L. Kasenga, Program Analyst Joseph Rutherford, Program Specialist Nancy L. London, Program Analyst Nicola Y. Pinson, Program Analyst To obtain copies of this report, please call the Boston Regional Office at (617) 565-1050. Reports are also available on the World Wide Web at our home page address: http://www.dhhs.gov/oig/oei EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PURPOSE To assess the effectiveness of the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) adverse event reporting system for dietary supplements in protecting the American consumer.
    [Show full text]
  • Paul Sheridan Letter to Fiat Spa Chairman John Elkann Re Walden
    March 18,2013 Dear Customer: The following is the proof-of-delivery for tracking number 799286644310. Delivery Information: Status: Delivered Delivered to: Receptionist/Front Desk Signed for by: .DEMARIE Delivery location: 250 V NIZZA TURIN 10126 Service type: FedEx International Priority Delivery date: Mar 18, 2013 11:02 Special Handling: Deliver Weekday Shipping Information: Tracking number: 799286644310 Ship date: Mar 15, 2013 Weight: 2.4 lbs/1.1 kg Recipient: Shipper: MR. JOHN ELKANN, CHAIRMAN PAUL V. SHERIDAN FIAT SPA DDM 22357 COLUMBIA STREET DDM CONSULTANTS DEARBORN, MI 48124 US Reference Fiat-Bill Elkann-1 Thank you for choosing FedEx. To: Mr. John Elkann * Chairman, Fiat SpA 250 Via Nizza Turin, Italy 10126 011-39-006-1111 Date: 15 March 2013 VIA FEDEX INTERNATIONAL AIRBILL 7992-8664-4310 From: Mr. Paul V. Sheridan DDM Consultants 22357 Columbia Street Dearborn, MI 48124-3431 313-277-5095 / [email protected] Subject: United States Government Safety Defect Investigation EA12-005 – Jeep Fire Death/Injury References: Mr. Remington Cole, Mrs. Susan Kline, Mrs. Ana Pina, et al., Jeep Fire Death/Injury Victims) Courtesy Copy List ** Mr. Clarence Ditlow, Director Secretary Ray LaHood Center for Auto Safety - Suite 330 US Department of Transportation 1825 Connecticut Ave, NW 1200 New Jersey Ave, SE Washington, DC 20009-5708 Washington DC 20590 (202) 328-7700 202-366-4000 Mr. Sergio Marchionne, Chairman Mr. Courtney E. Morgan, Jr. Chrysler Group LLC Morgan & Meyers, PLLC / Suite 320 1000 Chrysler Drive 3200 Greenfield Road Auburn Hills MI 48321-8004 Dearborn, MI 48120 248-576-5741 313-961-0130 Mr. David L.
    [Show full text]